Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Teen sex doesn't merit spot on registry
By A TIMES EDITORIAL
Published March 22, 2007
The Legislature is finally acknowledging what parents have realized for generations - teens have sex, and while it shouldn't be encouraged, they shouldn't be labeled as criminals. Bills moving through the Florida House and Senate could spare teen lovers the stigma of registering as sex offenders. This is a common-sense change that redirects the weight of the law toward the true threats to society. Florida's sex offender registry law lumps together sexually active teens in consensual relationships with people such as John Couey, the Citrus County man found guilty of raping and burying alive 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford. Whatever one thinks about teens and sex, the registry was designed to warn the public about safety threats, not embarrass and complicate the lives of teens well into their adult years. The Senate Criminal Justice Committee approved a bill Tuesday that would enable teens to petition the courts to be kept off the registry. The exemption would apply in cases where the victim was at least 14, the offender not more than four years older and free of any previous sex offense, and in cases where the sex took place without coercion. The House is moving a similar bill. This sensible change keeps the registry's original purpose intact without branding teens with a ruinous label that could close careers, invite harassment and restrict where they live and travel. Lawmakers wrongly counterbalanced this move with heavier sanctions for serious offenders. There is no need to pander. Only 200 of the 40,000 on the registry would be affected were this the law today. Police and prosecutors already make judgment calls in teen cases, and having a judge examine consent would add accountability to the process. That's fairer than how the law treats these young offenders now.
[Last modified March 21, 2007, 23:05:05]
Share your thoughts on this story
Comments on this article
|
by elizabeth
|
03/30/07 09:04 PM
|
|
The law was enacted for sexual predators. we have muddied the waters and knee-jerked ourselves into ignoring the constitution and imposing retroactive punishment. you can call it anything you want but it is still punishment.
|
|
by Chance
|
03/22/07 01:12 PM
|
|
This sensible change does not keep the registry's original purpose intact. The registry was intended to safeguard against the most violent and predatory offenders. The advent of mandatory minimums and civil commitment have invalidated its existence.
|
|
by Joe
|
03/22/07 11:59 AM
|
|
Jane, your creep belongs in jail, not on a list. So put him there. But no one deserves to be tagged and discriminated against for the rest of their lives after they've served their punishment. You want to punish them forever, don't let them out.
|
|
by gh
|
03/22/07 11:25 AM
|
|
I also think the 200 figure is low, but I agree. No way should a 19 who had consensual sex with a 15 be branded for life. I disagree with the 4 yr gap though- doesn't the law say 6 yrs for stat rape if over a certain age? Make it make sense.
|
|
by Jane
|
03/22/07 11:11 AM
|
|
*Rights-infringing*? Did you catch this? http://www.sptimes.com/2007/03/22/Southpinellas/Arrest_in_attack_may_.shtml
There's a diff between stigmatizing teens and keeping tabs on criminals like this creep. THIS guy is what the list is for.
|
|
by Prince
|
03/22/07 11:00 AM
|
|
It's a beginning. The registry has destroyed hundreds of thousands of lives when you include the innocent spouses & children of offenders. Many were first time offenders whose offense did not involve sex, force or violence.
|
|
by Joe
|
03/22/07 10:04 AM
|
|
It's a step in the right direction--that direction being to abolish these rights-infringing registries altogether. A criminal pays for his/her crime with jail time. Stigmatizing them and unjustly limiting their lives after that debt is paid is wrong.
|
|
by Richard
|
03/22/07 08:36 AM
|
|
We tell a 16yr old that they aren't mature enough to have sex consentualy and then put them on a registry ruining their lives. Yet on one hand they aren't mature enough and on the other we can charge them as adults and give life in prison. CRAZY
|
|
by Richard
|
03/22/07 08:33 AM
|
|
I find the figure of only 200 to be quite low from what many can see if they read the registry. It's about time that lawmakers wake up and remove people from the registry that should never be on it to begin with. It has made a joke of the registry.
|
|
by JT
|
03/22/07 06:50 AM
|
|
Senator Storms used the tried and true approach of those on the left by overstating the case and then negotiating away what wasn't the goal all along to the relief of opponents. Good to see the change, especially for the children of our state.
|
|
by tj
|
03/22/07 06:21 AM
|
|
Hoorah! Finally some common sense. Now my sons don't have to fear their emotionally charged girlfriends will play the "he had sex with me without my consent" excuse after they break up.
|
|
by agin
|
03/22/07 06:11 AM
|
|
I support the change, not the PC rationale behind it. An older guy is more likely to be seriously interested in the younger girl, which a guy a few years older is more likely to be just using her for sex and less likely to support a baby.
|
|
News
Fifty years ago, they were screwed-up kids sent to the Florida School for Boys to be straightened out. But now they are screwed-up men, scarred by the whippings they endured. Read the story and see a video and portrait gallery.
Print
Email story
Comment
Email editor
